Brian4Liberty
10-21-2011, 01:18 PM
“I think the president did the right thing, he just took too long to do it and he didn’t do enough of it,” Rubio said at a news conference today. “Had the U.S. gotten in early, aggressively and decisively, today would have happened months ago, Libya wouldn’t be as destroyed, it wouldn’t cost as much money to rebuild, there wouldn’t be as many people dead or injured and there wouldn’t be as many injured or rockets missing.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/sen-marco-rubio-says-had-us-moved-more-aggressively-gadhafis-killing-would-have-happened-months-ago/
What makes Rubio think there wouldn't be as many dead if the US had acted more aggressively? Heavier airstrikes would have created less death and destruction? How does that work Rubio? Sending US troops like he and Lyndsey Graham have suggested would have resulted in US deaths!
It would have most certainly resulted in more US casualties, more US money spent, and more shredding of the US Constitution, there can be no question about that. So much for Rubio being a "conservative" or a supporter of the Constitution.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/sen-marco-rubio-says-had-us-moved-more-aggressively-gadhafis-killing-would-have-happened-months-ago/
What makes Rubio think there wouldn't be as many dead if the US had acted more aggressively? Heavier airstrikes would have created less death and destruction? How does that work Rubio? Sending US troops like he and Lyndsey Graham have suggested would have resulted in US deaths!
It would have most certainly resulted in more US casualties, more US money spent, and more shredding of the US Constitution, there can be no question about that. So much for Rubio being a "conservative" or a supporter of the Constitution.